Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    August 30, 2014 12:00pm-12:31pm PDT

12:00 pm
and face champs as the reversed mentioned we have an opportunity with our disabled students we are addressing those champions and making this the best school year thank you to the mayor ed lee and the mid grade and making sure that our families choose our public schools first and i see behind us is the executive branch and all who help to make our schools great >> thank you dr. murase with that let's get on to learning and we look forward to many successes and thanks to the incredible staff for being great hosts thank you for welcoming us and thank you for being here..
12:01 pm
>> it is august 19 entertainment commission meeting to order. please turn off or put your phones on vibrate and all recording devises during our meeting and we want like to send sf gov tv for sending us out over the airwaves. can we have a roll call please. >> commissioner perez. >> here. >> commissioner akers intl here. >> commissioner joseph. >> here. >> commissioner lee. >> heir. >> commissioner frost. >> here. >> vice president hide. >> present. >> president tan bryant tan is out of town and excused for
12:02 pm
this evening so we have a quorum. >> all right. so the first thing we're going to do today is open up public comment. this is where members of the public may address the commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter and jurisdiction within the entertainment commission but not on our regularly scheduled program. do we have any public comment? seeing none public comment is closed. [gavel] so next we are going to review and approve the meeting minutes from august 5, and -- so i have a couple of changes they would like to make. >> all right. >> absent were cake cake and commissioner lee and i'm not
12:03 pm
sure if liam was here so i wanted to check with that and commissioner hyde moved to continue item c to april 19 i think it's august 19. >> i move to approve with commissioner hyde's changes. >> second. >> [inaudible] >> because you weren't here. >> actually we can't vote on this. >> they're not enough of you. >> i move -- i amend my motion. i move to continue the minutes. we only have three commissioners here. we need four on vote on the minutes. >> so there is a motion to continue. is there a second? >> second. >> commissioner lee seconds. commissioner perez. >> aye. >> commissioner akers. >> continuation. >> it's just a continuance.
12:04 pm
>> aye. >> commissioner joseph. >> 50eu6. >> commissioner lee. >> aye. >> vice president hide. >> aye. >> all right we're ready for the report from the executive director. take it away jocelyn kane. >> thank you. good evening commissioners. this is going to be short and swee. we have a guest that will pop up in the middle of this -- in fact right away of my director's report because we thought it would be easier to present this to you. under the heading of policy and legislative update there was discussion but a request from i think commissioner hyde to have someone from london breed's office who is the author of the legislation here before you to talk about this file regulating mechanical amusement device and arcades so he's here now if you want him to do this and then i can resume the rest of my
12:05 pm
director's report. >> great. >> thank you director kane and commissioners. i will keep this as short as i can and happy to answer any questions but by way of background the entertainment commission staff originally brought this issue to us. ms. blackstone sent us information about a business in district 5 in the upper haight and a t shirt screen printing shop that added a number of arcade games and ran into problems with the planning and police code and actually solicited support from their customers and users of the arcade games and it's a great business. we know it well. supervisor breed knows it well and we want to support it so we read through the operative portion of the police code and 6,000 words dating back to 1982 when there were concerns that arcades were over returning the
12:06 pm
neighborhoods and corrupting the youth and reading it it didn't seem relevant and clauses that they can't be open during school and kids will skip school and 30 years later they can pull the cell phone out of their pocket. there are lots of stipulations where they can be in respect to other arcades. the police are entitled according to the current police code entitled to search arcades anytime for any reason so there were things as a policy matter presented a concern to supervisor breed and i think several of her colleagues shared that concern as well so we worked with the police department and your staff and vice president hide and thank you mr. vice president for that to develop a comprehensive section of the police code to
12:07 pm
encourage the handful of arcades we do have in the city and make sure that the entertainment commission has a role to play and work with particularly bars that have games so you can implement the good neighbor policy and that is a important distinction because what we set out in the legislation is a two tier system. businesses that are a restaurant or shop are treated differently than bars with games and that came from the concerns of your staff and from the commission that you wanted a foot in the door. you want to work with bars on the good neighbor policy and that's a different circumstance than a shop that has a street fighter two in the back so that is reflected in the legislation. i can go into some of the history how it's evolved and i want to apologize we didn't bring this to you before. it went to the board of supervisors and rushed before the august recess in july and went to land use and passed
12:08 pm
unanimously on first reading before the august recess. with that said there were some concerns from your executive director and from staff and from vice president hyde about an amendment that was made at land use, and we met with executive director kane and the city attorney and supervisor breed right before the august recess after that board meeting and came up with what i think is a compromise that will benefit all sides so let me walk through how that evolved. the original legislation said a bar could have one game but as soon as it gets two games it needs a permit from the entertainment commission. nan bars can have up to 10 games before they get a permit and that's not changed and they're off the table and there is strong consensus that they can have 10 games before they need a permit but as it was submitted a bar can have one
12:09 pm
game but if it has two it needs a permit. supervisor kim which is on the land use didn't like that and too much of a hassle to small business owners and made an amendment that a bar could have up to four games without a permit. as soon as they got the fifth they needed a permit. that passed in committee with supervisor breed's support. although she is not on the committee. i spoke on her behalf and went to the board and passed unanimously and your board had concerns with that and now supervisor breed is ready to make additional modifications that a bar can have one game without a permit. if it has 2- 10 games it will get a director staff level permit from the director or the designee. there is a lot of precedent for this. planning does this and if you
12:10 pm
say want i to change the port core by 5-inches and stamp is it and give you the permit. i think it's news to the entertainment commission but there is precedent in other departments and then any business that has 11 or more games require a permit from the commission itself so just to review the compromise we're proposing if a bar has between 2- 10 games they get a staff level permit from the commission. any business with 11 games or more would get a entertainment commission permit from the commission here. a bar with one wouldn't need a permit or a restaurant or some other business with -- 1-10 don't need a permit if i didn't lose any of you with that long winded explanation i am happy to answer questions. >> commissioner joseph. >> i'm sorry. just a point of order i want to add a couple of
12:11 pm
things. i think connor is trying to be brief but it's complicated but i want to reaccrue the commission and yes it's a new thing for us and over the counter permit. however, the process for suspensions, revocations, like appeals, those things are all in place so if we do begin to have trouble with something you didn't see at the front end we have every option to bring it before the commission because it's under our purview so that is more understandable or comfortable to you then i wanted to add that. >> okay. thank you. >> okay. if we're not issuing a permit with a bar with one mechanical amusement game how is it under our purview? >> that wouldn't be. >> so that would be the problem for the police? >> that's correct. >> i agree with you that the code is archaic and needed to be changed, but i have a couple of
12:12 pm
questions just for clarification to make sure that i understood. up to 10 games if it is a restaurant or a burrito shop or a pizza place? is that correct? >> that's correct. >> and if it's a restaurant that serves alcohol it's also -- >> we went back and forth with the city attorney and the planning department on this how specifically to define a bar and you will see in the legislation i think it's -- correct me if i am wrong director kane but a type 43 and i don't have the legislation in front of me -- >> type 41. >> but the planning department defines a bar as an establishment that sells liquor and that's their primary source of business, so there are restaurants that may have a beer and wine license that wouldn't be categorized as a bar. >> there are restaurants that have something called a type 47 license which is required to have food and they have full bars -- >> so the legislation at moment
12:13 pm
defines bar as abc license type 42, 48 or 61 so 47 are not a part of this. >> okay. just so that your office understands 47 is a full alcohol license, not beer and wine. >> but it's -- >> but they serve food. >> right. >> okay. so a place -- okay. so the -- sorry, the other thing i wanted to ask was so 2- 10 games in a bar. is there a size the bar should be to have 10 games in it? have you thought about that? can a bar be a 49 occupancy and have 10 or nine games in it? what have you determined on that? >> those are calculations that are pretty well handled by other aspects of san francisco code,
12:14 pm
the building code, the code and the entertainment commission doesn't seem like the place to litigate that and we met with them on this and there are other tools in the tool box to address that. >> so to staff does the planning department have in ttion code a process to disallow a certain number of video games or any games for that matter and say a 49 occupancy? >> i don't think it's about occupancy necessarily. it's about the square footage and there is a table in the planning code. >> there is. >> i am certainly there is and you know how the planning code works. it's variable but i believe it's addressed and in addition obviously as you know if somebody doesn't have a area footage it's a fire hazard if something is wlok blocking the
12:15 pm
door. there are other departments that are regulatory that the come into play. >> including ada. >> okay. last but not least if there is no fee with the permits that we issue, not the one, but the one that is over one, and we do cost recovers as -- is that not correct in our commission, we do cost recovery? how do we recover the cost for enforcement or anything else we might do? >> so you want to speak to that. >> go ahead. >> connor didn't -- there's a little confusion here so one of the reasons that we met again with to address the supervisor's concerns and pressures on small business and not wanting to lose the oversight we had but also want to be mindful of them trying to give small businesses a break so one of the things in
12:16 pm
this negotiation after the first read was that we would say that there was no application fee because as you know there are two places we have money collection. the first is an application fee which is -- when you were talking about in terms of certain cost recovery. everything the city does is cost recovery for the most part. we would forgo that application on the friend end but we agree that a license fee which is the thing that renews these permits would remain intact and that is something that is an annual fee that's based on the enforcement of these permits, so -- >> it's a lot cheaper than the application. >> it's a lot less and somewhat of a mail in thing, and it was a middle ground i think. >> yeah, i think one of the policy directives that you heard from the supervisors at land use and from my boss who isn't on the committee that the existing
12:17 pm
police code was cumbersome for businesses and frankly too expensive and i heard several time when is developing this legislation and not just supervisor breed scprtds "why don't you delete the section entirely?" so it was a balance to strike with the entertainment commission and the prerogative policy direction from the board. >> my only thing to say to you the only thing that ticks me off about this is this a permit that comes out of this department and this department is a regulatory agency and i would have really appreciated you affording us the courtesy to bring this to us before you did it and have that discussion and include us in it, so i agree with you the police code can be cumbersome and if you decide to change more of it in the future when it has to do with our commission it would be great if you contacted our staff and spoke with them about it ahead of time instead of after the fact.
12:18 pm
>> we did work with the supervisors office's staff but as far as bringing it to commission that's a different kind of commission. but before it was introduced and -- commission is hard or impossible to do. >> to be frank with you as i alluded with my comments ms. blackstone broached the conversation to begin with so we were working with your staff from day one. >> okay. >> commissioner perez. >> thank you for coming. do we know how many businesses are affected by this new legislation? >> do you have it? do you have it from memory? do you have it? okay. >> go ahead. >> so i did a table which i didn't bring because i thought connor -- i expect connor to do everything but basically 80 mechanical amusement device permits that we have. i believe 68 of them are actually bars
12:19 pm
and so i think there were 10 bars that have just one, and the rest of them have between two and 10. >> okay. >> sorry connor. >> commissioner frost. >> so we will have no jurisdiction over a bar if they have one machine and it turns into a gambling thing or a payoff like the old days? >>i am glad you brought up that topic because your colleagues in the department brought that up a few times and we wanted to be very sensitive to the concerns and putting effort to strengthening the provisions around gambling to make it explicitly clear any mechanical amusement device changed is not a device and couldn't get a
12:20 pm
permit and pattonly illegal and we wanted to express that the police has authority over gambling devices and there is language in the legislation that says that the police has the authority to investigate concerns about gambling and seize any gambling devices so we wanted to draw that distinction clearly that we're talking about strictly games for amusement and that was your former colleague, commander garretty stressed that to me and games for amusement. >> okay. even the ones used for amusement in years past on pin ball machines if you got a certain score you get more games and they were getting paid off by the bar by having more games so it looks like it's straight up amusement and then i know nothing about it but i heard something it
12:21 pm
went on in ingleside and a machine turned into a gambling machine and i'm just talking off the top of my head and the police department signed off on this and okay with the amendments? >> i don't want to speak for them but the commander was there and i think he was comfortable with the compromise we made and i worked with them in developing gam gambling controls and we listened to their input and tried to incorporate it and without speaking for them i think they okay and we incorporated their suggestions. >> any other questions? commissioner akers. >> thank you for coming and i may have missed this in your presentation but for
12:22 pm
establishments that are already permitted what happens with them? do you expect that anyone is going to come forward and ask for their money back? >> no. >> i mean or have a resentment? >> that's a good question. this is kind of funny. in working with the deputy city attorney she made a comment it's rare to see regulations become less strict so there are bars that have permits that no longer need them or businesses that will no longer need them and we put into the legislation there won't be refunds but they're not required to reapply when it expires because they won't need a permit. >> so the permit is active until it expires under the original conditions that they got the permit from this commission. >> so commission almost i would
12:23 pm
say 100% of the mechanical amusement device permits that we have the only condition is a good neighbor policy. >> okay. >> and the good neighbor policy will be in effect -- >> except for one. >> unless you have one and the rest will continue to be billed every year on their license fee and their permit is still intact between 2- 10. >> okay. >> okay. >> okay. we will see. >> any others? all right. i just wanted to thank you very much for coming into commission as per request for supervisor breed i would like to go on record of saying i was much more conservative than she was on this legislation and i am proud to say it. >> thank you. >> thanks. >> okay. got through that. next thing on my list is just to -- i wrote down the board is on
12:24 pm
recess which is why there isn't a lot of stuff to talk about relative to legislation. they will be back on the second of september which is when this legislation goes to second read so we will obviously be present. the -- under staff and office update i wanted to speak to the commission about our annual party which i had yes recognized that we have an annual party in july as sort of a birthday party and we had missed that window and i end interested to do a holiday party but vetoed by some people in the room and do something in between the july date and the holidays begin so we choose october 7 because that's one of our regular commission days. we have typically done this as a meeting and beautiful do a five minute meeting and no permits, agendize and then we have a party, so
12:25 pm
for now that's the date you should mark on your calendars. we will do an off site agenda october 7 and the location is tba for right now. we're sort of working through what we always work through what we can afford and what we can't, so that's that and i think that's it for me. i think i'm going to hand it over to -- who goes first? mr. pauley. oh i didn't talk about beyonce, did i? see i have such a bad memory i didn't want to talk about beyonce/jay z. all right in order to rehash the lovely evening we had two tuesdays ago as you may have heard literally there were concerts at att park, one on a tuesday night and one on a wednesday night and at tuesday
12:26 pm
it started by eight. by 9:00 o'clock every live in person in san francisco was either on the person, on the phone and telling social media they could hear every word to every song or feel it, or whatever so we went into crisis mode at this point and long story short which i am sure i will get questions on. wednesday's performance was much, much improved and the narrative in the media was the same that people in potrero hill that partied on the deck the night before couldn't hear a thing. it wasn't perfect. there was tremendous tweaking to the sound system done and i want to thank commissioner joseph and my enforcement staff for stepping up and going to this concert which i was not willing to do and working with at the sound board working with the promoter, working with the
12:27 pm
giants and i want to thank the giants. they're not here tonight but for apologizing and working to fix it the night after. we do certainly intend before another concert of that size to have protocol created. i have been trying to in the last home stand negotiate a meeting with the giants but it's busy for them and may wait in fact until the season is over until we get anywhere but for the record we won't be issuing a loud speaker permit for at&t for a public concert without coming to you first without ever again so now i can take questions. >> i have a question about that. so that -- the promoter of that was -- >> live nation. >> live nation and they're a
12:28 pm
large corporation. >> international. >> international. they come in and the whole city hears that and i am wondering what we have to hold them accountable for the mismanagement because when we have small mom and pop operations that behave improperly we have ways of taking them across the coals until they behave well and i am wondering what is our recourse for a corporate giant like that. >> so just for -- we can speak to this too but recourse and our process for enforcement and regulations has to be the same across the board. like we can't differentiate between someone because they're a large company versus a small mom and pop but the point is the issue is with the giants. the giants are the responsible entity at this point because it's their property leased to the giants and they decide whether to allow live
12:29 pm
nation. sometimes they allow a different promoter to come in but they're the responsible entity and the question is what do we do with the folks that we permitted in terms of punishment if you will? that is obviously in the commission's hands. we have a process to follow if it's a citation. with loud spikers at this point it's awkard to suggest you would take a permit away after the thing is over with, but again that's the protocol we need to bang out going forward given the size of the venue and the open air nature of the venue, and whether or not there should be things in place like db restrictions or other things and not just punish who they're booking and what kind of sound systems come in because we had many concerts that nobody
12:30 pm
complained about so obviously there are differences between those and that's the work that we have to do. >> just to add to that. i am glad you said we issued the permit to the giants and not live nation because that's what we did but to understand a little better these big concerts travel with their own gear so it's not like the giants or live nation had any say about what their gear would look like so they hung the gear and i guess they didn't do much of a sound check and we had an inversion layer in the city and an inversion layer it holds the air down and sound that usually goes up in the air on a clear night and you can see in the penthouses of san francisco an inversion layer causes you to hear it on the ground so that's kind of what happened. they did spend a


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on